Talk:Star Trek (film)/Archive 2008
About: To accomodate the influx of discussion on the pending feature film, older discussions for this talk page can be found in the 2006 and 2007 archives. Forum:The New Star Trek Movie and New Enterprise I was just wondering if Memory Alpha would be posting the new USS Enterprise pictures from the movie as the official pic, or if the cite would have to wait for the movie to become cannon. Furthermore are there supposed to be Romulans, Klingons, or any other established races in the movie or will it create an entirely new race? Thanks :In terms of the images, one of them has been added to the article about the film. My bet is that the rest should wait until the movie's release. A couple of images, not so bad, lots of them... bad. :) :In terms of races in the new movie... like us, you'll just have to wait and see. -- Sulfur 05:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC) Star Trek Teaser Trailer While It Lasts! View it while it lasts on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RllSZW_YLk8 Sorry if this shouldn't be here. Just figured some people might want to view it. - TerranRich 21:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC) :Actually, please don't view it on YouTube or anywhere else at the moment. The bootleg versions really don't do the trailer justice. Just wait for the official online release of the trailer on Monday. Trust me, you won't be disappointed. --From Andoria with Love 01:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC) "We don't know..." Regarding the comment "We don't know that the corridor is that of the Enterprise..." Actually, we do. The whole site is about spying the construction of the Enterprise. That said, I think it's cool to leave it vague... kind of makes one thing "Gee, I wonder where that could be?" ;) --From Andoria with Love 03:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC) Has anyone else noticed what appears to be the Companion Cube from the game Portal in the top left part of the screen? Just thought that that was worth noting. not sure why the trailer shows people welding metal on the enterprise. current airplanes are made from carbon fiber which you don't weld. hopefully in the future they have not regressed. ::We don't know how the materials used to build the ship are put together. Maybe they are welded. I know the TNG Tech Manual speaks of "gamma-welding".--31dot 12:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Maybe Cruise or Spielberg ? According to this page http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=58437555&blogID=339305578 an A-list star is featured in the new film. His appearance in the film is an absolute secret. Maybe Tom Cruise's or Steven Spielberg's visit on the set http://trekmovie.com/2008/01/18/tom-cruise-visits-trek-set/#more-1463 was not "only" a visit. ;o] – Tom 01:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC) :He was probably referring to Tyler Perry, whose involvement was confirmed December 31st. The producers reportedly wanted to keep his involvement under wraps for a bit longer. --From Andoria with Love 02:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC) MA used for movie Hey, guys. Just thought I'd share this. I asked writer Roberto Orci on TrekMovie.com if they used Memory Alpha for research while writing the film. Here's the entire discussion: ;Me: Mr. Orci, :''I am a contributor and administrator at Memory Alpha (http://www.memory-alpha.org/). Did you guys use Memory Alpha when researching for the movie? And if so, can MA expect to receive a mention in the end credits? ;Roberto Orci :''We absolutely used Memory Alpha during the entire process, and still reference it occasionally during production. It was great to be able to refer the less educated members of the team to your great site. THANK YOU! :''Will see what I can do about credits. Not a bad idea at all. So, not only did they use MA, we might actually get a mention in the credits! Awesome, yes? :D --From Andoria with Love 23:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC) *For the record, you can find the interaction here. See #504 and #514.--From Andoria with Love 23:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC) ::Haha, that's great to hear! It was a good question after all, right ;-) Thanks to Mr.Orci for replying! Good to hear the work we're doing here is also of use for the pros. Can't wait to include all the bits and references from the movie! ::Anyway, speaking of MA-Star Trek movie interactions: We should definitely go for the webmaster program on the official movie site. I think MA definitely qualifies. Maybe Harry and some of the admins (can you here me, Shran?) could go for it and represent us? Just as you said in the thread at http://trekmovie.com, Shran, we should create pages for every person involved in the movie (as we're already doing), people working in front of and behind the scenes. For spoiler reasons, we won't add any details of the plot or add pages for the characters as long as the movie hasn't been released. Creating and expanding articles about the people working ON the movie is an area that we can work on until it is released. --Jörg 10:44, 27 January 2008 (UTC) :::Well, '''Jörg' just made me enter the webmaster program thing. I have no idea what this entails, but I'll let you guys know what happens. As you can see above ("From the Horse's Mouth"), they already contacted us before, via their agent. So this is cool :P -- Harry ''talk'' 13:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC) ::I'm definitely signing up! I was contemplating it before, but I never really considered myself a "webmaster." But I guess wiki administrators are close enough, right? :-D By the way, would MA be considered a "Fan Site" or "Other" :-P --From Andoria with Love 19:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC) :::I just got my signup finished (I listed it as a Fan Site). Apart from some links to the trailers and images released, there's a 'webmaster link' that leads to the offical website. Everytime someone clicks on that link, MA will get 1 point. I have no idea what those points are supposed to do, but it would be nice if you could use this link for all links to the new movie website. -- Harry ''talk'' 22:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC) ::::EDIT:' They just did away with their points system (they hadn't settled on any rewards, and people were misusing it to generate silly click counts). -- Harry ''talk'' 20:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC) ::I listed it as "Other". Blame sulfur. :-D I don't see any link leading the the official site, though... unless you mean the movie logo at the top? Everytime I click that, it just reloads the webmaster page in a new tab. Very odd. :P --From Andoria with Love 06:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC) ::*nm, I see what you mean. :) --From Andoria with Love 06:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC) In need of shortening and protection? Hey, gang. I recently learned that, while Star Trek: Enterprise was on the air, pages for episodes that had not yet been aired had been protected to prevent the addition of information. Since that was the practice back then, should it not be the practice now? I realize this article has been edited in the past several months more than any other article (mainly by me :/) and the movie is still nearly 12 months away... so should we limit some of the info on this page and protect it? Here's what I was thinking... I am currently working on a revised edition of this page at User:Shran/Star Trek XI (a "final cut", if you will :P) which would replace the current page once the film is released. However, that page is currently limited to background information with excess info on plot, casting, etc. removed because that info will already be present in the summary and the cast/crew list. I was wondering, though, perhaps we should replace the current info on this page with the info on that page? This way the info will be limited to the basic, need-to-know stuff. Maybe... I dunno. Regardless, perhaps this page should be protected and no further information added (with the exception of updating it to say that filming has ended) until the film opens? Basically, what I'm trying to do here is A.) reduce the number of edits made to the article (in other words, telling me to stop adding crap :P) and B.) reduce the number of spoilers in the article (there is no plot info, but there is stuff on characters, species, and ships). The thing is, MA policy says we include information from material released by official sources (i.e. Paramount, people working on the movie), and the info on this page, I think, primarily consists of info that has been officially revealed or at least revealed unofficially and later confirmed officially. What do guys think? Thoughts? Suggestions? Comments? Complaints? Post 'em here. :) Oh, and while we're on the subject, if we do anything with this page, we should also think about what to do for the various actor pages that have been created which also divulge character information. This will also affect certain entries on Performers approached for Star Trek roles. --From Andoria with Love 02:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC) :I would oppose protection, except in the event of chronic vandalism (which, I have to say, I'm quite surprised not to have seen yet). We're in a completely different situation to Enterprise, here - the lead time is much longer compared to episodes, where we would get a title, brief synopsis and a few guest stars maybe a month or so before airing, and a few more details between then and the airdate. Here, useful (and use''able'') material is coming in every day. We've never had to deal with a new movie before, and this one is much more media- and detail-intensive than any before - if this were , it would be much less detailed, simply because we would be dealing with the same cast and crew as always. :All the information is confirmed from Paramount or other official sources, so our spoiler policy is not an issue. And there's a huge great note at the top of the article, which could probably be adapted slightly. Perhaps, in general, some sort of template box, warning about STXI spoilers could be placed on each relevant page - it could be used to more significant effect when the movie comes out, but it may be a useful warning to readers who randomly stumble upon actor pages. :I wouldn't replace this with your "release version" just yet, simply because more material is coming in - essentially, you'd be adding this version of content to that version, a sort-of half-condensed, half-expanded article which would be somewhat jarring. We should keep updating this one as it is, add more condensed material to the release version as relevant, then we can pop that one over this one later in the year, maybe once production is finished - things should die down a little as a result. Hopefully. :) -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 10:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC) That was kind of my line of thinking, as well. I know this is the first film release since MA was created, so it would definitely be a different scenario. I just noticed the previous efforts taken to ensure no info was added to upcoming episodes and was just wondering if the same efforts should be implemented here. I like the idea of a revised spoiler template for each of the production page – but I'm not particularly sure others will be fond of it since. I'd be willing to add them, though. --From Andoria with Love 16:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC) No androids construct the ship? We already have (rudimentary) androids that can vacuum and do other chores for us. Moreover, the movie starts in c. 2244 for crying out loud, so why do we still need organic welders? Why didn't they put in self-aware autonomous welder bots in their place? Welding is dangerous anyway and we would be in our right mind to plan to consign dangerous (and mundane) tasks to artificial intelligence. --K. Shinohara 16:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC) :Speculation. This isn't the place for that kind of "futurist" discussion, the same kind you continue to bring up all over the wiki. The Trek world is what it is, "futurist" or otherwise. It's not the real world. This type of discussion belongs on a Star Trek forurm, which this wiki is not. -- Sulfur 16:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC) :c 2244 in the Star Trek world, not the real world. Don't get them confused. -- 15:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC) Robert April Any word on whether we'll have Robert April appear in this film? After all, he is/was the 1st captain of the Enterprise. --70.179.191.225 18:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC) :There is no word on whether or not April will appear in the movie. The film may not even cover that point in time. --From Andoria with Love 21:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC) Crew list organization I have reorganized the crew list by separating them into their various departments. I was thinking maybe we could adopt this format for all the other movie pages; either that, or we could reorganize them to match the actual on-screen credits. Let me know what you guys think. --From Andoria with Love 16:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC) :I support this, also for the other films. These departments show structure and you can easily find someone. We have many, many people who are not listed on these movie pages and when they all (one day) have their article and credit, the whole list would be too long, so the department sections are appreciated. – Tom 16:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC) ::They should match on-screen credits... similar to what we've been aiming to do with cast listings. Those are (often) arranged by department, but not completely so. In the interim, it makes sense to sort them by department, until we actually get that credits sequence to work from. -- Sulfur 16:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC) ::And as a followup to... myself... Anyone uncredited should be in a section at the end of all of that, and if there are enough, sort them by department. :) -- Sulfur 16:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC) :Yes, but except the cast members, the performers on-screen should be placed right behind the credited cast, as we already do. ;) – Tom 16:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC) Doing it in credits order and keeping them sectioned will be a bit difficult, at least for the first batch of names. The main titles of a movie list most (though not all) of the film's department heads. After listing the cast, the typical order for credits are: casting director(s), composer, costume designer, vfx supervisor (this one might appear earlier in the credits or in the rolling credits), associate & co-producers (if any; these might come between composers and costume designers), film editor(s), production designer, cinematographer, executive producers, producers, story basis (i.e. based upon "Star Trek" created by Gene Roddenberry; this credit might come between exec producers and producers), writers and, lastly, the director. A music supervisor and make-up effects person might be thrown in there, as well, depending on the movie, but these are normally in the rolling credits. As for the rolling credits, those are kind of all over the place at first. They typically begin now-a-days with the unit production manager and assistant directors, followed by the cast list and stunt people. After that, it goes to hell. Art directors/set decorators are generally listed first after the stunt people. In the case of , there's art directors, set decorators, concept artists, and senior production associate, followed by camera people: operators, photographers and loaders. Then there's script supervisor, second unit production members, sound mixers, boom operator, cable & video, lighting techs, electricians, grips, prop masters, the special effects team, production coordinators/associates/secretaries, location managers, and set dressers. At this point, we start to get a little order -- costume department members, make-up artists, hair stylists and some art department members. Then it gets a little random again until we get to the sound/music department and the individual vfx company credits. Not all movies are like this, though; some credits are nice and orderly and well-organized. Maybe this movie's credits will be, as well... but the Nemesis creds certainly weren't. --From Andoria with Love 22:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC) *I'm thinking of again separating the principal crew (those generally listed in the opening/main title credits), while keeping the separate sections for the other crew members. Would that be okay with everyone? --From Andoria with Love 05:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC) Old crew Just a small question. Is the usual crew mostly out? By usual I mean the people that have been working on the shows and movies before like Michael Westmore, Robert Justman etc.Vegfarandi 17:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC) :Bob Justman's been retired for a while. I haven't heard anything about Michael Westmore working on the project, and it seems unlikely. Thus far, the only confirmed people working on this movie who have worked on Trek in the past are Leonard Nimoy, Greg Ellis, Chris Doohan, John Eaves, Mark Garbarino, Barney Burman, Rob Burman, Russ Herpich, Joey Box, Jon Braver, Lin Oeding, Dennis Scott, and Xuyen Valdivia. But, for the past part, the crews who have worked on the last few films are out. I would expect the credits to look more like Mission: Impossible III than Star Trek Nemesis, Insurrection, etc. --From Andoria with Love 04:58, 16 February 2008 (UTC) Spoiler Template Just writing this note to avoid any misunderstandings. Shran reverted the addition of the 2008 spoiler, stating that it was already covered on the page. However, if one was to read the statement already there, the fact that MA contains spoilers is easy to miss. Having both: * looks nicer and is consistent (all 2009 ST film pages have the template) * makes it clearer that: first MA contains spoilers, and second, MA contains info on citable info (the point of the second note).– Cleanse talk 05:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC) :Well, for one, this page now contains a link redirecting to itself. For another... why would we need to say that a page on the new Star Trek movie contains information on the new Star Trek movie? The spoiler was created to be added on other production-POV pages because their titles do not immediately tell you what kind of information they contain (i.e., you could not tell by just reading the name Chris Pine that it has anything to do with the movie). In this page's case, however, it very obviously has to do with the movie. Therefore, the spoiler template is very redundant on this page, IMO. --From Andoria with Love 05:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC) Sorry, I guessed I jumped the gun a bit Shran. On my browser, I didn't see a self-link, so I assumed it was automatically removed. I should have really brought this up on the talk page before re-reverting. I copied the code from the template to make a more appropriate message, which I think better captures what I meant. Now, the link to the spoiler policy stands out a bit better (as it gets its own sentence). Combined with the old note I think it's a bit more watertight.– Cleanse talk 06:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC) :I can live with that. Good work. :) --From Andoria with Love 07:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC) Added New External Link Hi there, just adding a link to a blog run by an official Star Trek Webmaster (Paramount certified), this mirrors the same link on the main wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29#External_links Cheers! Filthish 01:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC) :We're not putting TrekMovie in as an external link, so... we're not putting other blogs either, even though they're "officially in the paramount webmaster program" -- Sulfur 14:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC) Include the original props and effects in Star Trek 2009 Will the new Star Trek Movie 2009 have an Enterprise bridge that will look like the bridge Captain Pike commanded in "The Cage"? Will they actors be wearing those gawd-awful uniforms along with those rediculous looking mini-viewers at each station? Will the transporter make the same sound effect as in The Cage? It sounded like it was going to blow up right then and there. Where will the original Number One be? I cannot imagine this new Star Trek movie without Number One. Will Mr. Spock be emotionally out of control as he was in The Cage? I hope the new movie stays in line with Star Trek "The Cage". :The bridge of the Enterprise in the new film will resemble the way it looked in the original series but it will be updated to look more futuristic. There is no word yet on what the Pike-era uniforms or the bridge will exactly look like. Ditto on the sound effects. There's also nothing on Number One -- don't even know if she's in the movie (I would assume she is). As for Spock showing more emotion, that's possible. I seem to recall Zachary Quinto stating his Spock would be exploring his emotional control or something in the movie. As for staying in line with "The Cage," the writers have promised that the movie stays in line with canon (to a point). I don't think the events of "The Cage" are in any danger of being contradicted or obliterated... not that that's the important thing, in any event. --From Andoria with Love 04:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC) Revamped ENT I have a composite shot of the saucer I asked someone to make for me from the trailer. It shows the entire forward section of the saucer. Could it possibly be included in the article? --WTRiker 00:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC) :I don't see why not. I would upload it as a new version of this image, though. :) --From Andoria with Love 00:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC) This is the pic . It is not as wide, but gives more vertical detail. Whaddya think? --WTRiker 20:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC) :That looks fine. Go ahead and re-upload it as a new version of this image and I'll delete the one linked here. Or you can just replace the one in the article with the composite and I'll delete the replaced image later. Your choice. :) --From Andoria with Love 16:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC) I'll keep this one and dump the old one. I'm still slightly on the "new" side of wiki. I've used them, but don't edit that often. Could you tell me how to delete it? Thanks for the help.--WTRiker 17:30, 13 July 2008 (UTC) :I'm afraid an administrator will have to delete the old image. Go ahead and replace the image in the article with the composite shot and I'll delete the old image. --From Andoria with Love 17:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC) Already done. --WTRiker 20:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC) :And the old image has been deleted. All is now right in the universe. :-D --From Andoria with Love 20:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC) Is Nero a Romulan? It has been assumed that the character of Nero is a Romulan. The poster released at San Diego Comic Con shows the character and he doesn't look like any Romulan we have seen before. A recent interview by E! with Clifton Collins Jr. (General Ayel) indicates that Nero is a Romulan. Collins said, "Me and Eric Bana are the new Romulans." http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/marc_malkin/b23815_star_trek_scoop_romulan_speaks.html However, there is an erlier interview with writer Alex Kurtzman by UGO. Kurtzman is asked what is going on with Nero's ear in the San Diego Comic Con poster. Kurtzman responds, “Nero isn’t necessarily a Romulan... It’s all part of the plot.” http://movieblog.ugo.com/index.php/movieblog/more/fear_your_blackberry_eagle_eye_preview/ To me, this indicates that Nero's character may not be Romulan as we know it. There could be many possibilities. He could be Romulan as much as Shinzon is Reman I attempted to change the article to indicate this, but it was changed to say that it is confirmed that Nero is a Romulan. I think it is too early to confirm that he is a Romulan. He may or may not be. Any thoughts? :Take a look at the Nero promo shot here. Take a good look at his chin tattoo. Then jump over to this. See a resemblance? Jpers36 20:57, 16 August 2008 (UTC) ::Besides, we have countless reports and interviews of actors, etc. stating Nero is, in fact, a Romulan. Kurtzman says Nero "isn't necessarily a Romulan..." in other words, he's a Romulan, but Kurtzman doesn't want to admit that to the public as a fact. Most likely, what was meant is that Nero isn't like the other Romulans we know. For the record, Nero's ear as seen on the posters looks like it has been either burned or chewed off, and it was revealed long ago that none of the Romulans in the film will have cranial ridges. Long story short: yes, he is a Romulan, just maybe not the kind of Romulan we're used to seeing. It doesn't get more concrete than the actors saying "we are Romulans." --From Andoria with Love 00:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC) Just released!: new pictures Someone want to add a mention and/or pictures as seen here USS Kelvin at TrekMovie.com and New images at TrekMovie.com? --[[User:WTRiker|WTRiker] 02:03, 16 October 2008 (UTC)] : I had added them and they were removed - Nx1701g 04:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC) ::Mentioning them is one thing, but we cannot have any images from the actual film on this site until the film is released as it violates the spoiler policy. Also, we do not have permission to use those specific images as they were given exclusively to those official sites and provided by Industrial Light & Magic. --From Andoria with Love 05:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC) Romulan appearance :from talk:Romulan According to TrekMovie.com, it is "confirmed that the Romulans in the new Star Trek do NOT have the extra forehead ridges seen in the TNG era". Should this fact be added to the Physiology section, as at the moment it states that "most Romulans have two brow ridges above the bridge of their nose, forming a V-shape on the forehead. However, a minority of Romulans lack these ridges, making them outwardly indistinguishable from Vulcans". As more Romulans are seen browless, including all in the upcoming film, should this be changed in the article? CaptainRedHook 20:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC) :Nothing on the new movie should go in this article, background or otherwise, until after the movie comes out. This is per our Memory Alpha:Spoiler policy. The only pages that should have content on the movie are the pages devoted to that movie, namely . --OuroborosCobra talk 20:58, 22 October 2008 (UTC) :Ah... sorry everyone. CaptainRedHook 02:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC) USS Kelvin :from talk:Nacelle... From the wallpapers that are being available from promotional sites such as intel, it's now clear that the USS Kelvin only has one Nacelle - should it get a mention here? -- 15:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC) :Seeing as there is no USS Kelvin in canon, I would say no. Also, promotional sites such as that aren't considered canon either. Sorry. ----[[User:Mainphramephreak| Willie]][[User Talk:Mainphramephreak| LLAP]] 15:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC) :: Better yet, read the spoiler policy. --Alan 15:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC) Website updated The website has been updated with new posters and other stuff, if someone wants to add it to the article. -- 12:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC) Spoiler proposal I've made a suggestion about dealing with spoilers from the film in in-universe articles here; people who are following the film's production and spoilers are welcome to chime in (and shoot the proposal down if you want). —Josiah Rowe 22:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC) Certain aliens in canon I'm not sure where else to ask this. I've heard from other sites that having Romulans in the movie is against canon, since it is (supposedly) established that the Federation doesn't encounter Romulans until later. However, I can't find any evidence of that. Anyone know if this is accurate? — 11:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC) :The main events of the movie takes place before the events of , when the Federation had their first encounter with the Romulans in over a century in addition to first learning what Romulans look like. The movie seems to be contradicting this by having the Federation not only encounter Romulans a few years prior to that episode but also having them come face-to-face with them. --From Andoria with Love 15:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC) Will the in-universe material from this film... be placed in Memory Alpha or Memory Beta? Wratched 13:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC) :When the movie comes out then it will be placed here. — Morder 14:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC) ::It will be an aired movie won't it? :) I'm sure that MB will add the information too though, supplementing it with the comic book series leading up to the movie's release, and all. -- sulfur 15:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC) Get ready Just get ready for this. It really appears as some of the uniforms in the new film will be original series 2266 era (gold/red/blue). But wait...how will this be explained that the movie is actually set during the pilot uniform era (tan/brown/blue). I hope we will not be dealing with one of these "just pretend it didnt happen" things. I for one was REALLY looking forward to seeing pilot era uniforms, perhaps with some higher ranking insignia than just the one stripe we saw in the "The Cage" and the two in "No Man Has Gone". Regardless, this might cause us to have to seriously revamp the uniform and insignia articles. I guess we will see...in about 7 months. -FC 03:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC) :Here's an idea: let's not talk about it until we need to, say around . We'll deal with it then, because we can't deal with it now (see site notice -- that includes talk pages, or at least it should). Also, please keep in mind that talk pages are to be used only to discuss the quality of the page, not for idle chit-chat on what will be in the movie. --From Andoria with Love 03:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC) Here's an idea too...LIGHTIN' UP! :-) I know all about the site notice and would never add anything to an actual article about this. But it is without a doubt going to cause a problem since the film will apparently contradict uniform continuity...or uniform uniforimity...or something like that.... -FC 04:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC) :I'm as lit up as anyone here. :) The fact of the matter is this is, like, the hundredth discussion expressing concern over some canon issues from the movie and the response will always be the same until May 8th: we will worry about it then, because we can't worry about it now since we just don't have enough concrete evidence as to not only what will change but why it will be changed. This is also the upteenth time a discussion like this has been brought up on a talk page which these pages are, in fact, not for this sort of discussion. They are to help improve the quality and content of the article, not to alert people as to the impending doom of their beloved canon because the uniforms are the wrong style. (By the way, you're worried about the uniforms? Have you seen the bridge?) So, yah, I was lightened up about a hundred posts ago dealing with the same canon doomsday scenarios. That light has dimmed since then – it's just become monotonous. The movie doesn't come out for another five and a half months. Let's not concern ourselves over something before we know if we should be concerned about it, mmkay? :) --From Andoria with Love 05:48, 23 November 2008 (UTC)